AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

I admit the article was older than I thought, and I have heard rumblings about this in the past, but seriously cyclops, Obama's administration is the first one that would actually seriously consider this sort of thing even sensible, let alone try to implement. Be honest, Obama is proposing to punish greenhouse gas emissions. I haven't heard him mention cows yet, but he most certainly is energy companies, and both are just as bad in terms of policy. Throw in the fact that global warming is not in any way shape or form a settled science, no way, so the policy is based upon pop science, not sound science.

A thought about taxing cows, who is going to pay the tax on all the wildlife, deer, elk, bison, on down the chain, the trillions of prairie dogs, the list is endless, as surely they also emit methane in some quantity. Who pays that tax, government? And who do they pay? And how about human methane. Do taxpayers now pay a fat tax, or a methane tax, based upon how much methane producing diet they intake? And what bureaucracy will knock on your door to monitor this? I know that you believe the green economy is a job producing economy, perhaps this is the type of jobs you refer to?

Liberals have painted themselves into a corner of total silliness.

A thought about the green economy producing jobs, this is so wonderful, the 21st century green economy is going to produce jobs by the millions! Liberals do not ever consider the efficiency of a job, which is determined by the free market. If its only jobs we care about, not efficiency, cyclops, lets hire millions to throw bricks through windows, just think of those jobs, and all the glass repair jobs created! That is the genius of Obama's new economy!

Not idiotic, just pointing out the idiocy of liberalism. I added, edited the above post as well, you may wish to read again.

Everybody could work themselves in this country until we are all totally broke and destitute. Unless jobs are based upon efficiency and actually producing more wealth than is expended, it is not too bright of a path to prosperity.

There is no guarantee that a future conservative administration (or Congress) will be any wiser or less venal than the present one. Errors and corruption exist on both sides of the doctrinal divide. On average, I believe that a conservative government will do less harm than an activist liberal one. However, the phrase "on average" covers a lot of ground -- no guarantees either way..

A House subcommittee unanimously passed Wednesday a measure the author dubbed the "Gene Stipe Memorial Bill” to rescind the state pension of any state or county elected official who was found to have violated the oath of office. House Bill 2175 would apply to former officeholders found to have violated their oath after they left office, said the bill’s author, Rep. Jason Nelson, R-Oklahoma City. The measure now goes to the House Appropriations and Budget Committee.
http://newsok.com/in-brief-oklahoma-house-panel-oks-gene-stipe-bill/article/3346973

Oklahoma introduced a bill a few weeks ago--not sure if it made it all the way--that would be soooo great at the federal level:
... ... ...

A thought about the green economy producing jobs, this is so wonderful, the 21st century green economy is going to produce jobs by the millions! Liberals do not ever consider the efficiency of a job, which is determined by the free market. If its only jobs we care about, not efficiency, cyclops, lets hire millions to throw bricks through windows, just think of those jobs, and all the glass repair jobs created! That is the genius of Obama's new economy! Everybody could work themselves in this country until we are all totally broke and destitute. Unless jobs are based upon efficiency and actually producing more wealth than is expended, it is not too bright of a path to prosperity.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed.htm
THE FEDERALIST PAPERS
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed36.asp
No. 36
Hamilton
But there is a simple point of view in which this matter may be placed that must be altogether satisfactory. The national legislature can make use of the SYSTEM OF EACH STATE WITHIN THAT STATE. The method of laying and collecting this species of taxes in each State can, in all its parts, be adopted and employed by the federal government.

Let it be recollected that the proportion of these taxes is not to be left to the discretion of the national legislature, but is to be determined by the numbers of each State, as described in the second section of the first article. An actual census or enumeration of the people must furnish the rule, a circumstance which effectually shuts the door to partiality or oppression. The abuse of this power of taxation seems to have been provided against with guarded circumspection. In addition to the precaution just mentioned, there is a provision that "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be UNIFORM throughout the United States.''

Foxfyre wrote:

Oklahoma introduced a bill a few weeks ago--not sure if it made it all the way--that would be soooo great at the federal level:
... ... ...

Does this mean that there's no law/bylaw/regulation like that?

Even while those on the left hold those on the right in contempt, they seem to think it a weakness when the MACs (Modern American Conservatives) criticize the GOP or those who are identified with the right or conservatism. Too many won't criticize those on their side when warranted and will strain at gnats to defend them or they use the "your guy does it too" argument.

For me, I would like all sides to agree to do the right thing, or at the very least do their best to do no harm. I get so tired of playing the 'whose is blackest' game or choosing between the least corrupt.

"...disgusting hypocrisy..."

You even can loose your pension here when you commit some malfeasance after you've left office .... (A former [conservative] senator [=state minister] in Hamburg will loose his pension - or at least parts of it - because he helped one terminally ill person to suicide.)

Quote:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed.htm
THE FEDERALIST PAPERS
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed36.asp
No. 36
Hamilton
But there is a simple point of view in which this matter may be placed that must be altogether satisfactory. The national legislature can make use of the SYSTEM OF EACH STATE WITHIN THAT STATE. The method of laying and collecting this species of taxes in each State can, in all its parts, be adopted and employed by the federal government.

Let it be recollected that the proportion of these taxes is not to be left to the discretion of the national legislature, but is to be determined by the numbers of each State, as described in the second section of the first article. An actual census or enumeration of the people must furnish the rule, a circumstance which effectually shuts the door to partiality or oppression. The abuse of this power of taxation seems to have been provided against with guarded circumspection. In addition to the precaution just mentioned, there is a provision that "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be UNIFORM throughout the United States.''

"Let it be recollected that the proportion of these taxes is not to be left to the discretion of the national legislature, but is to be determined by the numbers of each State"
After the 16th Amendment taxes are to be determined by the number of annual dollars of income in each state. There is no authorization (i.e., no Constitutional grant of power) that our national legislature (i.e., the Congress) can vary the tax per annual dollar of income depending on how many dollars are annually earned.